<p>What have Auburn stats done during that period? I know a lot of kids go to AU. There are a fair # that go to MS State too.</p>
<p>There are too many variables to point the finger at UA as to not attracting enough in-state kids. I know the ‘second tier’ colleges in Alabama have grown. Troy grew to Troy University; University of South Alabama (which maybe is a first tier or close to first tier) now has a football and band program. I know kids going to both these schools under scholarship where the merit award would not have been so generous at UA for their stats</p>
<p>I suspect some students are going where they are better matched, or a better financial fit.</p>
<p>Again, in terms of better financial fit, what you are essentially saying is that UA is pricing itself out of the in-state market. So I guess I ask, does that mean that UA is only for wealthy students?</p>
<p>And yes, it’s the state flagship. If students don’t want to go to the flagship, then that’s a problem. Does that mean that state monies should also be going from UA to these other in-state schools?</p>
<p>Quite a perspective for the system that is arguably the leading public university system in the US! Even down from the 80 and 70 percent, it is still very high. If it were much higher, we might start talking about a pulse and a wallet! </p>
<p><<<
From the 100,000 applicants, it has accepted more than 60 percent of them!</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>The really relevant UCs are UCLA, Cal, and maybe UCSD…and they aren’t accepting 60% of applicants. </p>
<p>UCLA got 80k applicants (don’t know the instate numbers) and only accepted 16k. </p>
<p>UCM probably accepts about 70% of applicants (if I had a premed Calif kid, I would consider sending them to UCM because it is so small and new, it is like a private at a public price.)</p>
<p><<<
And yes, it’s [Bama] the state flagship. If students don’t want to go to the flagship, then that’s a problem. </p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I don’t think it’s a case of 'not wanting" to go. Alabama families sometimes just can’t afford it (or justify the cost) if they have to pay full freight. I wish the state did provide grants, but it doesn’t. Years ago, there was a ballot initiative to have a state lottery to help fund grants, and it didn’t pass (fear of gambling). It is hard for a state school to fund need-based aid if it doesn’t have its state helping with that. Look at the state schools that are providing need-based aid…they either have strong endowments or state aid (or both). </p>
<p>Frankly, I think R&B costs are also driving full-pay families to consider commutable options. These full-pay families aren’t full pay because of high EFCs. They are full pay because their EFCs exceed Pell and their kids don’t qualify for merit. So a family with 2 kids in college each with an EFC of $10k will be full pay except for subsidized loan if neither child qualifies for any merit. It is unlikely that such a family (earning about $85k) can afford to pay $50k per year for both kids. Even with some state grants of maybe $5k each, the family won’t likely be able to spend $40k per year. </p>
<p>Bama does give nice merit to instate students with strong stats. Families whose children don’t have the stats to qualify might be hesitant to pay $25k per year for their modest-stats student who can get a good education at their local public for $10k. I know that I wouldn’t want to spend $25k per year for an ACT 23 child when he/she could commute to UAH for $10k. </p>
<p>Families in AL have to balance off what is said in post #63 and what mom2 and I have said on earlier posts. We both have lived in AL a long time. I use to work for UAH in the 1980’s, when in-state MI was more expensive tuition than OOS UAH - so hockey players would come to UAH, which had and maintains a respectable program. UAB and UAH have been working hard to develop more of a residential campus, although they also like to recruit local high stat students.</p>
<p>It would also surprise some than UAH at one time also had higher tuition than UA. This year UA is slightly higher than UAB, and UAB is slightly higher than UAH. UA, like AU has ‘fees’ that also make it difficult for those with tight finances. My DD’s fees at UA this semester was $552 - different fees from different depts; highest was $200 for music.</p>
<p>AU has a student service fee this semester of $ 804 according to my friends with students there - they changed things around so the fee that maybe were once covered under scholarship is no longer. AU built new student facilities so I guess this is the price paid.</p>
<p>This is from a friend, whose son is in architecture at AU (the only in-state public program for that major): " last fall AU charged $598 for registration and $200 for “pro-ration fee”. This fall, those charges have apparently been replaced by the $804 activity fee, so really only an increase of $6 from last year. My son is in Architecture and we have to pay $2160 in “professional fees” each semester that is really just extra tuition but of course isn’t included in his scholarship." </p>
<p>I am sure many state schools have gotten creative with their fees. So you really need to look at the entire cost to attend, not just tuition alone. Is UA “out of line” on tuition and fees? I don’t think so - at both UA and UAB I believe my students are getting a high quality college education.</p>
<p>We feel blessed to be in-state in AL. I am sure many who take advantage of college programs within AL are generally happy with degree plans and programs.</p>
<p>I guess some posters want to poke holes in our ‘happy bubble’.</p>
<p>@mom2collegekids: There’s the issue. You can’t evaluate the UC system like you’d look at the public system in nearly any other state. California has 38 million residents – it’s closer in population to a mid-sized European country than it is to the average state. Saying that only two of its public universities are “relevant” is just nonsense. And it’s still nonsense even if some in-staters believe that. </p>
<p>Or to put this in terms you can relate to, all other things being equal (costs, etc.), is Bama a better school than UC-Irvine? I’d argue no, and UCI is the #6 campus in the UC system. That’s the disconnect. </p>
<p>I am not saying that you can’t get a decent education at UA, and I think notions like ‘value’ are subjective so I will leave that aside. And UA has qualities that make it desirable, or we wouldn’t be seeing a 104% increase in out-of-state enrollment–which suggests it’s desirable enough that lots of families are willing to pay a much higher out of state tuition to attend.</p>
<p>I just find it surprising, and troubling, that the number of in-state students has actually declined since 2008. Given the fact that it’s the state flagship, in addition to the huge emotional attachment to the football program in the state (if you aren’t attached to the program at that other school), you would expect interest to attend to remain strong for students in-state. They have also completed an expansion of their engineering complex and added the Capstone School of Nursing in 2010, so it’s not like the U isn’t investing in programs that aren’t seen as getting you a job after graduation.</p>
<p>I think M2CK’s point was more about OOS/Internationals pushing in-state students out of those schools (and into the other UC’s) than about the rankings of the other UC’s. About the same number of in-state students are still getting into the UC’s, while overall enrollment has increased and % of in-state students have decreased in those schools “most in demand” by OOC/Internationals (like UCLA).</p>
<p>I also don’t see much value in comparing UA to the UC’s. Very different dynamics are involved in the increase enrollment of OOS/International student.</p>
<p>In-state student interest has increased over the last few years, but OOS/International student interest (applications) has spiked.</p>
<p>Looking at the entire realm is just as important as looking at the individual schools. Fwiw, you could easily remove Merced from the equation and it will not change much to the overall conclusions. In addition, the ease to apply to the multiple campuses is also fueling the large numbers at the 3-4 schools with the highest reputation among the UC system. With fee waivers, there is little to preclude a UCI student to throw in a couple of “you never know” applications at Cal, UCLA, or UCSD. Not that there is something wrong with that, as the tenet of CC application process is to cast a wide net with reaches, matches, and safeties. </p>
<p>It remains that the UC totals 100,000 applications to its system and accepts more than 60,000 of them and reject less than 40 percent of them. California is indeed a large state and those 100,000 applications is an indication of its size. In a thread that sensationalized the increase in OOS students accepted in California, it is important to note that the top educational system in the State has accepted its students in the 60 to 80 percent range, and that few selective students are left looking for a spot in the best colleges in California. </p>
<p>But that is cold comfort when CA’s population has increased immensely over the past couple of decades.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>CA’s population is larger than the entire country of Canada. (I like to point that out when possible, as it came as such a surprise to me when I learned it.)</p>
<p>“So few people east of the Mississippi would have encountered an actual UCSD/UCSB/UCI/UCD grad. Plus, those schools don’t have DivI sports teams to advertise their schools. And they’re relatively new. And they’re relatively small for publics.”</p>
<p>UC Davis is Div I and has a football team, and it’s also not all that new. It’s 108 years old, which is only about 20 years younger than Stanford. </p>
<p>We should not have to worry whether the hillbillies have not heard of any of these UCs. Before I worked in the Bay Area, I’ve never heard of UIUC either, UT of Austin, etc… Yes I was a suburbanhillies if there is a word.</p>
<p>“So few people east of the Mississippi would have encountered an actual UCSD/UCSB/UCI/UCD grad. Plus, those schools don’t have DivI sports teams to advertise their schools. And they’re relatively new. And they’re relatively small for publics.”</p>
<p>“UC Davis is Div I and has a football team, and it’s also not all that new. It’s 108 years old, which is only about 20 years younger than Stanford.”</p>
<p>UC Irvine is also D1 and has even won several national championships (albeit in sports most folks don’t follow like water polo and sailing). I’m pretty sure UCSB and UCSD are also D1. </p>
<p>Yes, actually that was my memory from an LATimes article I read awhile also. But since I was too lazy to find it again, I wrote “2 to 1, or something like that.” Here on CC, you have to give yourself some cushion, in case someone calls you on it, and says, “That is not true! It is 1.9 admins per student, not 1 to 1!” Thanks for calling me on it in my favor. </p>
</p>